High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh
Case Law Search
State of Punjab v. Chhinda son of Hari Chand, - CRM-85-MA-2006  RD-P&H 7289 (15 September 2006)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl.Misc.No.85-MA OF 2006
Date of Decision:18-7-2006
State of Punjab
1.Chhinda son of Hari Chand, resident of Village Jabbowal, District Nawanshahr.
2.Joga Ram son of Hari Chand, resident of Village Jabbowal, District Nawanshahr.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K S GAREWAL
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R S MADAN
PRESENT: Mr.JS Dhillon, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.
R S MADAN, J.
This is an application under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed by the State of Punjab to grant leave to appeal against the order dated 26-10-2005 passed by the Special Court, Nawanshahar in Sessions Case No.28 of 2003 registered under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
Brief facts of the case are that on 11-3-2001 a police party headed by SI Paramjit Singh was on patrol duty at the Bus Adda, Kahma where SI Paramjit Singh received secret information that accused Chhinda and Joga Ram along with their co-accused Makhan Ram (since absconder) were dealing in the sale of poppy husk and were present behind Crl.Misc.No.85-MA OF 2006
the Milk Plant in the area of village Kahma. The said secret information was sent to the police station on the basis of which a formal FIR was recorded. DSP Jatinder Singh was informed about the facts of the case. In the meanwhile, Mohinder Pal PW met the police per chance and he was associated as a member of the leading party. Accused Chhinda, Joga Ram and their co-accused Makhan (since absconder) were found sitting on the gunny bags. On seeing the police party, they managed to escape by taking the benefit of darkness. The investigator and PHG Bagicha Singh identified the accused and their accomplice Makhan. In the meantime, DSP Jatinder Singh reached at the spot, conducted the spot proceedings and found 10 bags of poppy husk and a scooter. 250 grams of poppy husk was taken out from each bag and the residue in each bag was found to be 31 kgs.-750 grams. Both the sample and residue were separately sealed and handed over to PW Mohinder Pal. The investigator prepared the rough site plan of the place of recovery and on returned to the police station he deposited the case property with the MHC Surinder Kumar and thereafter, arrested the accused.
On receipt of the report of the Chemical Examiner vide which the contents of sample parcels were opined to be poppy husk and after completion of formal investigation, the accused were challaned Accused Makhan had absconded during the trial and was declared proclaimed offender vide order dated 20-11-2004.
On appearance, the accused were charge-sheeted under Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, which was read over and explained to the accused to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
To prove its case, the prosecution relied upon the Crl.Misc.No.85-MA OF 2006
testimony of PW1 Constable Jagtar Singh, PW2 Rakesh Kumar, PW3 Head Constable Surinder Kumar, PW4 Bhupinder Singh, PW5 ASI Surinder Singh, PW6 Raghubir Singh, PW7 DSP Jatinder Singh and PW8 SI Paramjit Singh and closed the case of the prosecution.
After the case of the prosecution was closed, statements of the accused were recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which the entire prosecution version was put to them to which they pleaded innocence and took up the plea of false implication.
After going through the evidence led by the prosecution, the learned Special Judge, Nawanshahar acquitted the accused for the reasons recorded by him in para Nos. 16,17,18 and 19 of the judgment by observing that no identification parade was conducted by the prosecution.
Bagicha Singh, one of the witnesses, who identified the accused was neither cited as witness on behalf of the prosecution nor examined. SI Paramjit Singh had made a statement that the accused were identified by PHG Bagicha Singh, who was present with the raiding party. SI Paramjit Singh, who stated to have identified the accused as smugglers have not challaned them prior to this case inspite of the fact that he had the knowledge that the accused are indulging in the smuggling of contraband.
The Court also feels that link evidence is missing in this case because the samples, which were sent to Chemical Examiner do not tally with the seal impression on the case property.
We have gone through the reasons recorded by the learned Special Court, Nawanshahar in the aforesaid order and found no infirmity in the same.
Crl.Misc.No.85-MA OF 2006
In net result, leave to appeal is declined.
( K S GAREWAL)
( R S MADAN)
July 18, 2006 JUDGE
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.